And I thought iron forgiveness is overrated

[nsxguy]

6 hours ago, bladehunter said:

It matters because you’re delivery will change due to expectation of turf interaction.  If the expectation isn’t met , you’ll change to try to make it happen.  Plus - a lot of these wide soles irons have a very high vertical COG.  You have to come in steep to get the Vcog to the equator of the ball. 
 

in short.  Take a poorly fit club and hand it to a good player. He will almost immediately try to figure out how to hit it flush. Flush meaning middle of the horizontal cog and on the vertical cog.  Around where they meet. This spot is not the same on all or even most irons.  It will move up and down the face mostly. And sometimes in to the heel . Same exact delivery won’t find the perfect spot on each face.  

 

My friend, while you're saying the good player's delivery will "change due to expectation of turf interaction", what you seem to be describing is trying to find the sweet spot so as to "hit it flush".

 

I'm not seeing anything in your description about making contact with the turf, i.e. "turf interaction".

[bladehunter]

10 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

My friend, while you're saying the good player's delivery will "change due to expectation of turf interaction", what you seem to be describing is trying to find the sweet spot so as to "hit it flush".

 

I'm not seeing anything in your description about making contact with the turf, i.e. "turf interaction".

The way the club acts with the ground effects how you swing it.  As in AOA etc. I’m saying that if you have a wide soled iron with a Vcog that’s say 3-4 grooves or more up the face ,you will naturally get steep to try to get that Vcog down to the balls equator.  Example that I’ve had experience with is the ping i500.  
 

my greater point was. You fit the club to the swing. Not change the swing to fit the club.  If you’re a shallow divot person , a lot of wide soled irons with high vertical cog do not work well. 

[ShowMe]

53 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

It matters because you’re delivery will change due to expectation of turf interaction.  If the expectation isn’t met , you’ll change to try to make it happen.  Plus - a lot of these wide soles irons have a very high vertical COG.  You have to come in steep to get the Vcog to the equator of the ball. 
 

in short.  Take a poorly fit club and hand it to a good player. He will almost immediately try to figure out how to hit it flush. Flush meaning middle of the horizontal cog and on the vertical cog.  Around where they meet. This spot is not the same on all or even most irons.  It will move up and down the face mostly. And sometimes in to the heel . Same exact delivery won’t find the perfect spot on each face.  

 

 

The way the club acts with the ground effects how you swing it.  As in AOA etc. I’m saying that if you have a wide soled iron with a Vcog that’s say 3-4 grooves or more up the face ,you will naturally get steep to try to get that Vcog down to the balls equator.  Example that I’ve had experience with is the ping i500.  
 

my greater point was. You fit the club to the swing. Not change the swing to fit the club.  If you’re a shallow divot person , a lot of wide soled irons with high vertical cog do not work well. 

 

Ok, the VCOG part makes sense, I guess, although I thought that most wide-soled irons had lower centers of gravity given all the extra weight on the sole of the club.

 

But I still don't get the turf interaction part.  If I'm going to hit the ball first, then I really don't care about the turf interaction after I hit the ball.  By the time I hit the turf, the ball is gone.  For me, turf interaction only comes into play if I end up accidentally hitting behind the ball on a full shot or purposely on a flop shot.

 

Also, I never change my iron swing to fit the club, at least not consciously.  My index is 1.4, so I'm an ok player.  That said, I rarely hit an iron in the center of the clubface, my swing is just not consistent enough, which is why I use GI irons.

 

To me, the bounce angle of the club is much more important than the sole width when it comes to where you will strike the ball on the clubface.  Although, I guess there does seem to be a correlation between bounce angle and sole width in most irons' designs - i.e., wider-soled irons tend to have higher bounce angles, for the most part, than do narrow-soled irons.

Edited September 16, 2021 by ShowMe

[Billfitz]

47 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

 If you’re a shallow divot person , a lot of wide soled irons with high vertical cog do not work well. 

That's not my experience. With my longer irons I play the same flat swing as I do with my driver and hybrids, with no issues at all. I seldom take a divot with my 5 & 6, and when I do it's shallow. My swing gets steeper as I go progressively through the shorter clubs, with progressively larger divots. That's not a problem with my clubs, as their soles get progressively shorter.  This has been my style of playing for 40 years or so, so I haven't altered anything to suit the design of the clubs. What I have done is to find clubs that suit my swing.

[bladehunter]

10 minutes ago, ShowMe said:

 

Ok, the VCOG part makes sense, I guess, although I thought that most wide-soled irons had lower centers of gravity given all the extra weight on the sole of the club.

 

But I still don't get the turf interaction part.  If I'm going to hit the ball first, then I really don't care about the turf interaction after I hit the ball.  By the time I hit the turf, the ball is gone.  For me, turf interaction only comes into play if I end up accidentally hitting behind the ball on a full shot or purposely on a flop shot.

 

Also, I never change my iron swing to fit the club, at least not consciously.  My index is 1.4, so I'm an ok player.  That said, I rarely hit an iron in the center of the clubface, my swing is just not consistent enough, which is why I use GI irons.

 

To me, the bounce angle of the club is much more important that the sole width when it comes to where you will strike the ball on the clubface.  Although, I guess there does seem to be a correlation between bounce angle and sole width in most irons' designs - i.e., wider-soled irons tend to have higher bounce angles, for the most part, than do narrow-soled irons.

Here’s the example I use because  it’s an I iron I tried or like.  For 6 months. Ping i500. Widish sole , and forgiving.  But. It has a much higher Vcog than most irons. Specifically than the blueprint . You’d think it would be the opposite.  
My theory is that it’s to help the steep swinger.  I can’t figure what other purpose it would be. 
 

https://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_PING.pdf

checkout the Maltby pages.   You’ll be shocked at how the wide soled irons stack up as far as Vcog goes to other irons.  If you’re not steep , stuck and hitting it fat , you’d likely see bettter results with an iron with a much lower Vcog.  
 

the turf interaction is a factor.  Plenty won’t believe it. But it is.  I’m biased towards less bounce because i play mostly on clay based courses. Which are hard unless you get tons of rain. And even then it only softens up to be equal to a dry sand based course.    That being said. I get a wide sole IF you play in a wet area with a sand based course.  

Edited September 16, 2021 by bladehunter

[chisag]

13 minutes ago, ShowMe said:

But I still don't get the turf interaction part.  If I'm going to hit the ball first, then I really don't care about the turf interaction after I hit the ball.  By the time I hit the turf, the ball is gone.  For me, turf interaction only comes into play if I end up accidentally hitting behind the ball on a full shot or purposely on a flop shot.

 

 

... You will alway get a fight over this. But you are right, sole width makes no difference in the shot if you hit the ball first and then take a divot. Now that said, it can certainly feel different. When I switched from P790's to T100S irons I was delighted with the Titleist irons going effortlessly thru the ground. Kinda like the 790's felt like a dull butter knife going through the ground and the T100S felt like a scalpel. Feel can be an important factor for some but my P790's successfully bludgeoned their way through the ground producing beautiful iron shots, they just felt a little cumbersome doing it. As a feel player I preferred the T100S turf interaction but my shots with either iron were no better or worse because of the turf interaction. 

[ShowMe]

9 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

 

... You will alway get a fight over this. But you are right, sole width makes no difference in the shot if you hit the ball first and then take a divot. Now that said, it can certainly feel different. When I switched from P790's to T100S irons I was delighted with the Titleist irons going effortlessly thru the ground. Kinda like the 790's felt like a dull butter knife going through the ground and the T100S felt like a scalpel. Feel can be an important factor for some but my P790's successfully bludgeoned their way through the ground producing beautiful iron shots, they just felt a little cumbersome doing it. As a feel player I preferred the T100S turf interaction but my shots with either iron were no better or worse because of the turf interaction. 

 

That makes a lot of sense.  I can definitely agree with the feel part, and feel is very important for many golfers.

[ShowMe]

36 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Here’s the example I use because  it’s an I iron I tried or like.  For 6 months. Ping i500. Widish sole , and forgiving.  But. It has a much higher Vcog than most irons. Specifically than the blueprint . You’d think it would be the opposite.  
My theory is that it’s to help the steep swinger.  I can’t figure what other purpose it would be. 
 

https://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_PING.pdf

checkout the Maltby pages.   You’ll be shocked at how the wide soled irons stack up as far as Vcog goes to other irons.  If you’re not steep , stuck and hitting it fat , you’d likely see bettter results with an iron with a much lower Vcog.  
 

the turf interaction is a factor.  Plenty won’t believe it. But it is.  I’m biased towards less bounce because i play mostly on clay based courses. Which are hard unless you get tons of rain. And even then it only softens up to be equal to a dry sand based course.    That being said. I get a wide sole IF you play in a wet area with a sand based course.  

 

The i500 seems to be an outlier in terms of VCOG, though.  The G425s and the G710s have much lower VCOGS than the i500s, but their soles are a lot wider.  And the G400 actually has a lower VCOG than the Blueprints, and its sole is also a lot wider.  I don't think the i500 is representative of the average wide-soled iron (and, honestly, its sole is really not that wide).

 

I tried to like the i500s, too, but I didn't find them at all forgiving.  I honestly couldn't figure out what all the hype was about.

[Pomps]

I have a few sets of irons. This year I rotated between two, Srixon 785 and mizuno mp4, same shafts, length, lie, sw, etc. I played 38 rounds on my home course, about equal rounds with each set. In all rounds on my home course with the mizzy my average index is 4.9. With 785, it’s 7.5. I also hit two more greens per round with the mizzy. I thought maybe it was due to coincidentally driving better in the rounds with the mizzy, but I actually hit 5 fairways per round with both. Yes, driving accuracy needs work. Putts per round were also about the same. Clearly the mizzy are better statistically for whatever reason. However, I keep going back to the 785 because I tell myself I have no business playing blades if there are all these tour pros that don’t. I go to the 785, shoot 80 or worse, get pissed, go back to the mizzy, shoot 75/76, tell myself that’s better but blades are for tiger, rory and adam, go back to the 785, rinse and repeat. 

[ShowMe]

8 minutes ago, Pomps said:

I have a few sets of irons. This year I rotated between two, Srixon 785 and mizuno mp4, same shafts, length, lie, sw, etc. I played 38 rounds on my home course, about equal rounds with each set. In all rounds on my home course with the mizzy my average index is 4.9. With 785, it’s 7.5. I also hit two more greens per round with the mizzy. I thought maybe it was due to coincidentally driving better in the rounds with the mizzy, but I actually hit 5 fairways per round with both. Yes, driving accuracy needs work. Putts per round were also about the same. Clearly the mizzy are better statistically for whatever reason. However, I keep going back to the 785 because I tell myself I have no business playing blades if there are all these tour pros that don’t. I go to the 785, shoot 80 or worse, get pissed, go back to the mizzy, shoot 75/76, tell myself that’s better but blades are for tiger, rory and adam, go back to the 785, rinse and repeat. 

 

You probably have better turf interaction with the MP4's.

 

Just kidding @bladehunter !!!  lol

[Tax77]

Can anyone pin point on the face of GI irons where the +20 yards happens? Id love to hit that s*** every time.

[Pomps]

7 hours ago, ShowMe said:

 

You probably have better turf interaction with the MP4's.

 

Just kidding @bladehunter !!!  lol

 Hahah I have no idea what it is. The only thing I can guess is my natural iron ball flight is a draw with my miss being a hook, but the hook/draw seems to be less severe with the mizzy. Maybe it’s the lower offset?

[bladehunter]

8 hours ago, chisag said:

 

 

... You will alway get a fight over this. But you are right, sole width makes no difference in the shot if you hit the ball first and then take a divot. Now that said, it can certainly feel different. When I switched from P790's to T100S irons I was delighted with the Titleist irons going effortlessly thru the ground. Kinda like the 790's felt like a dull butter knife going through the ground and the T100S felt like a scalpel. Feel can be an important factor for some but my P790's successfully bludgeoned their way through the ground producing beautiful iron shots, they just felt a little cumbersome doing it. As a feel player I preferred the T100S turf interaction but my shots with either iron were no better or worse because of the turf interaction. 

And that’s all I’m saying.  I COULD play with a full set of hybrids.   Probably score the same. But the feel and flight of them is simply opposite of what I expect.  It’s not that I’m at all against anyone who prefers the opposite feel or turf reaction.  
  For me it just leads to chasing the preferred feel.  Which is change in delivery ,eventually , which leads to frustration etc. 

[Billfitz]

8 hours ago, Tax77 said:

Can anyone pin point on the face of GI irons where the +20 yards happens? Id love to hit that s*** every time.

Plus 20 yards is possible, with a total fail mishit, compared to a total fail mishit with blades. 20 yards closer to the intended line under the same circumstances is possible as well. The point with GI isn't hitting it longer or straighter with a perfect strike, because it won't be longer or straighter compared to a perfect strike with a blade or a perimeter weighted head. If you hit your irons perfectly all the time they won't do anything for you. If you don't then you may find them to your liking.

[ShortGolfer]

I bought a lefty club to get out of bad lies.  An SGI Mavrik Max 5I.  I experimented with swings to hit it straight, as I figure on average, this is the best strategy to get to a good lie and not into another bad one.

 

Edited September 16, 2021 by ShortGolfer

[chisag]

6 hours ago, bladehunter said:

And that’s all I’m saying.  I COULD play with a full set of hybrids.   Probably score the same. But the feel and flight of them is simply opposite of what I expect.  It’s not that I’m at all against anyone who prefers the opposite feel or turf reaction.  
  For me it just leads to chasing the preferred feel.  Which is change in delivery ,eventually , which leads to frustration etc. 

 

... There is so much that goes into this and at the top of the list is where you play. Nice soft fairways in the midwest where you can carve out a divot with a thin sole that almost feels like no effort from the club at all. Since moving to Phoenix a year ago most fairways are similar to playing in Great Britain where even taking a divot isn't always possible, not exactly bouncing off the turf but taking a few inches of hard disentigrating ground that you can't even find after the shot. And since most every course is Bermuda, even those that do not have really hard and fast fairways can produce those exploding non replaceable divots on the wiry grass and is nothing like the bent grass back in Chicago. Nothing quite like carving out an 8" divot that can go right back and after stepping on it, you can't even see where the divot was. The difference in turf interaction between my old P790's and the King Tour irons I am playing now is almost non existent here in the desert, where back in the Midwest it was very obvious.  I would still be playing the P790's if they could hold the hard fast greens in the winter here but alas I need more spin. 

... I also used to teach in the 90's and the amount of students I had with basically zero feel was far more the norm as opposed to better players with a keen sense of feel. The average golfer that plays once a weekend has no idea what turf interaction is. 

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, chisag said:

 

... There is so much that goes into this and at the top of the list is where you play. Nice soft fairways in the midwest where you can carve out a divot with a thin sole that almost feels like no effort from the club at all. Since moving to Phoenix a year ago most fairways are similar to playing in Great Britain where even taking a divot isn't always possible, not exactly bouncing off the turf but taking a few inches of hard disentigrating ground that you can't even find after the shot. And since most every course is Bermuda, even those that do not have really hard and fast fairways can produce those exploding non replaceable divots on the wiry grass and is nothing like the bent grass back in Chicago. Nothing quite like carving out an 8" divot that can go right back and after stepping on it, you can't even see where the divot was. The difference in turf interaction between my old P790's and the King Tour irons I am playing now is almost non existent here in the desert, where back in the Midwest it was very obvious.  I would still be playing the P790's if they could hold the hard fast greens in the winter here but alas I need more spin. 

... I also used to teach in the 90's and the amount of students I had with basically zero feel was far more the norm as opposed to better players with a keen sense of feel. The average golfer that plays once a weekend has no idea what turf interaction is. 

Agree on all points there.    For me.  I’m in upstate SC with 99 % red clay based courses.   So I know exactly what you’re saying. The divot I can replace. Is 1 out of 1000.  Or less. Which is why extra bounce has never been a help.  But I do get that in some areas I’d love it.  

[nsxguy]

16 hours ago, Pomps said:

I have a few sets of irons. This year I rotated between two, Srixon 785 and mizuno mp4, same shafts, length, lie, sw, etc. I played 38 rounds on my home course, about equal rounds with each set. In all rounds on my home course with the mizzy my average index is 4.9. With 785, it’s 7.5. I also hit two more greens per round with the mizzy. I thought maybe it was due to coincidentally driving better in the rounds with the mizzy, but I actually hit 5 fairways per round with both. Yes, driving accuracy needs work. Putts per round were also about the same. Clearly the mizzy are better statistically for whatever reason. However, I keep going back to the 785 because I tell myself I have no business playing blades if there are all these tour pros that don’t. I go to the 785, shoot 80 or worse, get pissed, go back to the mizzy, shoot 75/76, tell myself that’s better but blades are for tiger, rory and adam, go back to the 785, rinse and repeat. 

 

"Whatever the reason" ? Well, that's kind the point, isn't it ?

 

I'm not sure your conclusion is accurate - which is why the numbers really need to be drilled down to.

 

Par 72, 4 par 3s and 12-14 drives.

 

You hit 5 fairways per round. That leave 7-9 where you're hitting to the green out of the rough.

 

Isn't it possible the Mizzys simply work better out of the rough ? Rumor has it narrower soled blades/player's irons work better out of the rough than wider soled GIs. Not so ?

 

Could(n't) that account for a 2.6 index difference ? Not to mention your index is simply from 8 of your last 20 rounds. Have you used each irons set 10 times in the last 20 ? Or 19 of the last 38 ? You seem to suggest you calc'd all rounds with each set individually but I'm not sure I got that right.

 

Did you alternate irons round by round ? Play with one set 5 times in a row and then 5 with the other ? Most players go through hills and valleys in their ball striking. Perhaps you were using the Srixon's while you were in a "valley" and the Mizzys while going through a period of striking it well ?

 

Point is there are all sorts of ways to produce a handicap index. And while your conclusion seems to be fair,,,,,, who really knows ?

 

Not sure a specific iron set, or driver, or hybrids, or a putter is totally responsible for a/your conclusion,,,,,,

 

Anywho, so long as your happy with your results,,,,,,,, 👍

[mootrail]

18 hours ago, ShowMe said:

But I still don't get the turf interaction part.  If I'm going to hit the ball first, then I really don't care about the turf interaction after I hit the ball. 

 

Simply because, ball first, turf second really only applies to steep AOAs aka diggers.  As a sweeper, even though I may have that swing thought, I may and mostly likely brush the surface before striking the ball.  As it now turns out, thanks to launch monitors that brushing before the ball will produce the best numbers for low AOA sweepers.

 

So for a sweeper turf interaction before the strike matters more than if you're a pure digger.

[platgof]

I did not like the G425 as I wanted more distance., and they went the same distance as my G's. I am getting the G710 this week and they are a beast.  They will be an extra 1/2" longer and power spec as well. Playing the G700 and do well with them, but as the true WRX'er, we know new clubs are better. The hybrids I got have helped my game more than any thing.

[ShowMe]

41 minutes ago, mootrail said:

 

Simply because, ball first, turf second really only applies to steep AOAs aka diggers.  As a sweeper, even though I may have that swing thought, I may and mostly likely brush the surface before striking the ball.  As it now turns out, thanks to launch monitors that brushing before the ball will produce the best numbers for low AOA sweepers.

 

So for a sweeper turf interaction before the strike matters more than if you're a pure digger.

 

That's interesting.  I wasn't aware that purposely reducing clubhead speed like that produced better numbers.  Is it because by doing that the ball will contact the club higher on the face, resulting in less spin and presumably more distance?

[nsxguy]

[toddba11]

4 hours ago, mootrail said:

 

Simply because, ball first, turf second really only applies to steep AOAs aka diggers.  As a sweeper, even though I may have that swing thought, I may and mostly likely brush the surface before striking the ball.  As it now turns out, thanks to launch monitors that brushing before the ball will produce the best numbers for low AOA sweepers.

 

So for a sweeper turf interaction before the strike matters more than if you're a pure digger.

As a sweeper how much bounce are in your irons?  I would suspect it is fairly low?

[noodle3872]

4 hours ago, mootrail said:

 

Simply because, ball first, turf second really only applies to steep AOAs aka diggers.  As a sweeper, even though I may have that swing thought, I may and mostly likely brush the surface before striking the ball.  As it now turns out, thanks to launch monitors that brushing before the ball will produce the best numbers for low AOA sweepers.

 

So for a sweeper turf interaction before the strike matters more than if you're a pure digger.

 

4 hours ago, ShowMe said:

 

That's interesting.  I wasn't aware that purposely reducing clubhead speed like that produced better numbers.  Is it because by doing that the ball will contact the club higher on the face, resulting in less spin and presumably more distance?

Turf contact before ball producing better numbers is an interesting concept that’s going to be hard to prove. I’d call it a fat shot. As a shallow swinger of the club, I am far more prone to thin shots than fat shots. As Ian of TXG says, shallow swingers have their low point closer to the ball. 
 

Here’s a great video that shows how a shallow swinger can be fit. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8hwRiAli5s

 

[myspinonit]

On 9/13/2021 at 3:59 PM, jeffrey r said:

 

G425's with graphite shafts?  Oh, the horror!!  I resemble that remark.  In all seriousness, the G425's are so good.  Loving them, and very smooth with Steelfibers.  Good luck actually getting your set built.

A sweeper here. If i had the G425 irons with steelfiber it might be a different story, but I had. no control or feel with the Recoils.  A lot of that (from a fitter I saw after delivery and problems after a month of use)  was they were light for me in static weight and swingweight. Same with  the Glide 3.0 wedges with Recoils. I need vibration dampening with arthritis so haven't used steel in ten years.

 

Sold the irons just after a month.  Will try to sell the wedges too. I'm back to my Miuras and Vokeys with  Steelfiber and with heavier swingweight and static weight.  And smaller soles. Confident again with the clubs in hand after four rounds.

Edited September 17, 2021 by myspinonit

[Billfitz]

16 hours ago, mootrail said:

So for a sweeper turf interaction before the strike matters more than if you're a pure digger.

If you're a sweeper (I am) turf interaction before the strike shouldn't matter, because if you're doing it right there won't be enough of it to influence the strike. Bounce can be a problem in the shorter irons and wedges if you play those with a sweep, but that's easily minimized by placing the ball further back in the stance, which can effectively remove the bounce angle. It also promotes a steeper angle of attack, so you're more likely to hit the ball first.

[nsxguy]

10 hours ago, Billfitz said:

If you're a sweeper (I am) turf interaction before the strike shouldn't matter, because if you're doing it right there won't be enough of it to influence the strike. Bounce can be a problem in the shorter irons and wedges if you play those with a sweep, but that's easily minimized by placing the ball further back in the stance, which can effectively remove the bounce angle. It also promotes a steeper angle of attack, so you're more likely to hit the ball first.

 

Ping @MonteScheinblum

 

Care to comment ?

[Primo1868]

The cycle that I’ve been in is I will play a players cavity back, start to get a little shakey and then go back to game improvement. For some reason, after a while, I start to strike the GI irons poorly. Almost like I’m not “concentrating” as much to make quality contact because of the larger head size. Will revert back to players cavity and really focus on a quality iron strike and will start to play better. 

[NoTalentLefty]

Strong lofts and 17-4 investment cast steel? What’s not to love about forgiving clubs. 

[chisag]

On 9/16/2021 at 1:54 PM, bladehunter said:

 I’m in upstate SC with 99 % red clay based courses.   So I know exactly what you’re saying. The divot I can replace. Is 1 out of 1000.

 

 

... Here is a picture from a Snakebite gap wedge divot yesterday from an upscale semi private course Club head with a thin sole and and pretty sharp leading edge can't even get cleanly through the wiry Bermuda producing an exploding divot. (I filled the other idiots divot too).